New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1887-01-06
IN DEFENCE OF POOLS.
MR.. PLA1Ts SPEECH IN THE SENATE


ATTACKING THE COMBINATION CLAUSE OF THE
INTERSTATE COMMERCE BILL
WASHINGTON, Jan. 6.-The Senate to-day took up
Shs conference report the Interstate Commerce
bill, and was addressed by Mr. Patt OF Connecticut
He declared himseh IN favor Of legislation for the
regulation of the business Of the railroads, within the
extreme limits OF the Constitution. Moro than that ;
he in favor Of the pending bill, with exception
He had labored earnestly and eonscientously to
endeavor perfect the bill and he ready agree
with the conference report all points except one
The facts that in the year 1888 there had been
A37 900 of freight moved the railroads Of
the United States that at least 90 per cent OF that
csue under the definition OF interstate Commerce;
that the entire receipts 785 900 more than
twice as great as the entire income Of the Government
and that 1919 DOC, 900 OF this amount came from
freight alone. showed DIV vast the question was Bhe
discussion Of the conference report was narrowed TO
two issues The first whether tho Senate would
ADOPT the short aid long haul clause and the second
was whether 1t would prohibit pooling, instead Oh
leaving that question tor ths present to the nvese
ton Of the Railroad Commission. lie did not think
the short and long hanl" clause OF the conference
oopsder it an Improvement on the bill as it lett the
Senate He thought that the conference report clause
las to the distance being included within the
longer oistanceI was uncertain aud ambiguous 80 ,
As to the pooling clause IN the conference oil the
speaker declared that he could not assent 10 H. tie
and unjust and would embarrass 1t not defeat the
beneficial operations Of the BILL II was tor those who
proposed 1t to show that such trailc contracts lus
naned poos) either condemned by the common
law or Tar wrong In principle that beng
opposed public pohcy) 1t was just ana wIse
legislation to make them criminal offences Inc
character purpose and results OF pooling contracts
were entirely mi-underetood Ii WAS the evil signi1-
oxpce which att &C he'd to the word pool
that had created prejudice in the minds OF the
people, These uaf6o contracts under any other name
gould not be considered opposed to public Interests.
n had rtoAf RI rnm
baneful influence OF the word "pool, and had caied
Il what il was, operation" contracts tor trabc
bat without avail. The fact was that pooling CON
tract was simply an agreement between competing
lines to appori their competitive business IL ala
not touch the local business and had reference to
It. Local business was lett TO each individual lne
That was non competitive business and had nothing
to do with the through rates. - ,
On the subject of pooling Mr.. Platt quoted from tho
reports for 1879 lot Mr.. Nmmo. then Chief OF the
Bureau OF Statiscsl to show that boiling WAS merely
On superintendent of traffic between roads engaged IN
compettive traffic and from a pamphlet by Judge
Cooley 20 show that the purpose of pools ID to avoid
ruinous competition and unjust discrimination against
shippers. And he asked who would believe that, IN
bill ostepsiby for the purpose OF preventing unjust
determinations a clanse should be found making that
criminal which rail- Dad companies have resorted TO
prevent unjust discrimination lie challenged any
body to show that the object purpose the faith
full observance pool traffic was an thing else than
the maintenance OF stable rates he had taken ans
analy god the evidence taken before the Senate Com
mittee on Interstate Commerce, and cou d say that
three-fourths OF IL in favor OF the idea not OF pro
hibiting but OF lega1zing ana reguitlnS Iah'Ut
pools As to the maxim of competition reng the life
Of trade" he illustrated its taacy by assuming the
case OF third line OF railroad being constructed
between New-York and Washington, and said IL was
this tuiding of competing railroads where they were
not needed that had led to the necessity oil contracts
for the apportionmsnt OF competitive business. he
did not DENY that there were determinations
against shippers, but the determinations existed IN
spite of pools. Why. he asked declare that criminal
which had for its purpose that which was claimed TO
be one of the purposes of the pending bill II com
petition meant the Survival OF the httest and the
destruction OF the weakest it was anChristlan and
sntirepublioap and the society that favored would
laDse int o barbarsn. Ii the old pagan despotio
idea that :" might is right, and expressed In the
common phrase, ~ the devil take the hindmost"
Resolutions and petitions from number OF COM
Ipercia bodies in Pttsburg presented favorlng
the passage off the bill also memorials from the
principal cities of OHIO protesting strongly against H.
Mr. Cullom presented the resolution of Convention
of Boards of Railroad Commissioners OF Iowa.
Nebraska Colorado. Dakota. Minnesota, Missouri and
Kansas held in Des Mones December 10, 1885,
fnvorng the measure.